Jump to content

Big Tech/Social Media Censorship. Musk: Blackmailing Advertisers Can ***** Off.


Recommended Posts

CHICAGO —The American Library Association (ALA) kicks off National Library Week with the release of its State of America's Libraries Report, highlighting the challenges U.S. libraries faced in the second year of the pandemic – as well as the ways they innovated to meet the needs of their communities. 

Library staff in every state faced an unprecedented number of attempts to ban books. ALA’s Office for Intellectual Freedom tracked 729 challenges to library, school and university materials and services in 2021, resulting in more than 1,597 individual book challenges or removals. Most targeted books were by or about Black or LGBTQIA+ persons.

“The 729 challenges tracked by ALA represent the highest number of attempted book bans since we began compiling these lists 20 years ago,” said ALA President Patricia “Patty” Wong. “We support individual parents' choices concerning their child's reading and believe that parents should not have those choices dictated by others. Young people need to have access to a variety of books from which they can learn about different perspectives. So, despite this organized effort to ban books, libraries remain ready to do what we always have: make knowledge and ideas available so people are free to choose what to read.”

Below are the Top 10 Most Challenged Books of 2021:
 

“Gender *****,” by Maia Kobabe
Reasons: Banned, challenged, and restricted for LGBTQIA+ content and because it was considered to have sexually explicit images.

 

“Lawn Boy,” by Jonathan Evison
Reasons: Banned and challenged for LGBTQIA+ content and because it was considered to be sexually explicit.

 

“All Boys Aren’t Blue,” by George M. Johnson
Reasons: Banned and challenged for LGBTQIA+ content, profanity, and because it was considered to be sexually explicit.

https://www.ala.org/news/press-releases/2022/04/national-library-week-kicks-state-america-s-libraries-report-annual-top-10

Link to comment
Share on other sites

“Elon Musk not taking a board seat is bullish for free speech coming back to Twitter. The board seat was a proposed tactic by Twitter’s current execs & board to curb his influence (limiting his maximum shares to 14.9%). Musk can now pursue a hostile takeover if he so chooses. He acquired 9% of company shares from Feb to April. Will he get to 18% by June? Next SEC filing should be interesting to see! IMO this process is already happening. Shareholders don’t care about the woke stuff. And given Elon’s record of making shareholders rich, wouldn’t be surprised to see SJW panic in Twitter exec world right now.” What a wonderful thought. In a similar vein, the managing editor of New York Focus, Peter Sterne, tweeted: “Elon joining Twitter’s board was contingent on him agreeing not to buy more than 15% of Twitter. Now he’s not joining the board. So does that mean he can he [sic] buy as much of Twitter’s outstanding stock as he wants?” We can only hope.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Elon Musk offers to buy Twitter, take it private

 

Tesla CEO Elon Musk offered to buy Twitter for $54.20 per share

 

Tesla CEO Elon Musk offered to buy Twitter in a deal worth more than $43 billion and take the social media company private.

 

https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/elon-musk-offer-buy-twitter-take-it-private

 

Market Summary > Twitter Inc

45.85 USD+1.38 (3.10%)today

Closed: Apr 14, 7:11 AM EDT • Disclaimer

Pre-market 50.82 +4.97 (10.84%)

Edited by ALF
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait...what happened to "Twitter is a private company and they can do what they want?"

 

Which by the way is absolutely true, they can do what they want. What they can't do is make the claim that they act in the interest of free speech. Actually they can make that claim...but not without being liars.

 

 

  • Awesome! (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I block @BillStime and @Tiberius because they're both blithering moronic idiots not worth a nanosecond of my time. At the same time I'd NEVER be in favor of banning them from espousing their idiotic ramblings here on a daily basis or for disallowing others to engage in the pointless task of "debating" them.

 

Blocking someone from your individual feed is not a violation of free speech. 

 

Morons.

 

 

 

 

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DRsGhost said:

 

I block @BillStime and @Tiberius because they're both blithering moronic idiots not worth a nanosecond of my time. At the same time I'd NEVER be in favor of banning them from espousing their idiotic ramblings here on a daily basis or for disallowing others to engage in the pointless task of "debating" them.

 

Blocking someone from your individual feed is not a violation of free speech. 

 

Morons.

 

 

 

Is Musk a "free speech absolutist"?  My answer to Reich (I must point out an appropriate name for somebody advocating censorship) is probably not.  But Musk is a lot closer to that than Reich who holds a view that free speech is a threat.  

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Elon Musk is the most consequential man of his time.  In a hundred years, he'll be remembered as we remember Thomas Edison and Henry Ford today.  He's set up the first successful electric auto company and been largely responsible creating a couple other industries from scratch (private space flight, Ebay).  He's got several other irons in the fire - The Boring Company, being one example.   However, unless he figures out a way to clone himself, there's only one of him, it would be a shame to see him get diverted from more worthwhile goals such as creating a permanent presence for humans in space over something like Twitter

 

He must be seriously worried about the erosion of free speech to allow himself yet another distraction. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Artful Dodger said:

Elon Musk is the most consequential man of his time.  In a hundred years, he'll be remembered as we remember Thomas Edison and Henry Ford today.  He's set up the first successful electric auto company and been largely responsible creating a couple other industries from scratch (private space flight, Ebay).  He's got several other irons in the fire - The Boring Company, being one example.   However, unless he figures out a way to clone himself, there's only one of him, it would be a shame to see him get diverted from more worthwhile goals such as creating a permanent presence for humans in space over something like Twitter

 

He must be seriously worried about the erosion of free speech to allow himself yet another distraction. 

Maybe we start to hear it as soon as this morning, but I expect the same set of characters that insist that a private company can do whatever they want to insist the DOJ or some other regulatory agency "block" this takeover offer.  Citing "public interest" in blocking the deal.  Watch for most of the clowns in Congress and the administration that insist on censorship to be the most vocal as they attempt to bend light to support their argument that freedom is bad.

In reality this arrangement was never a private company doing as they please but rather government outsourcing censorship powers to private business in order to avoid constitutional limitations and public oversight.  Twitter takes their marching orders from activists inside and connected to the US government embedded in the government not to serve the people but to serve the party.  We all know the fact checker set up is a complete farce. 

 

If the deal does go through don't expect it to be before the November mid-terms. 

 

I also wonder if Musk envisions himself being involved day-to-day?  My guess is he'll do something like ask Joe Rogan to run the outfit.  At that point you won't need Space-X to launch liberals into orbit and unhinged and agonizing protest. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DRsGhost said:

 

I block @BillStime and @Tiberius because they're both blithering moronic idiots not worth a nanosecond of my time. At the same time I'd NEVER be in favor of banning them from espousing their idiotic ramblings here on a daily basis or for disallowing others to engage in the pointless task of "debating" them.

 

Blocking someone from your individual feed is not a violation of free speech. 

 

Morons.

 

 

 

 

Ha ha ha, the Little Russian Bot that couldn’t 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DRsGhost said:

 

I block @BillStime and @Tiberius because they're both blithering moronic idiots not worth a nanosecond of my time. At the same time I'd NEVER be in favor of banning them from espousing their idiotic ramblings here on a daily basis or for disallowing others to engage in the pointless task of "debating" them.

 

Blocking someone from your individual feed is not a violation of free speech. 

 

Morons.

 

 

 

 


Another LAMP from our in house deranged puppet - no one cares who you block. 
 

Classic narcissistic pos that can’t handle the heat.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...